thomaslaw wrote:Could you give your Pali evidence that the Buddha regarded himself as Indo-Aryan?

Buddha (DN3: Ambaṭṭha Sutta): "The rāja Okkāka is the ancestor of the sakyas."

Okkāka (Ikṣvāku) was a famous Vedic (pre-buddhist) king mentioned in the Ṛgveda and in many other pre-buddhist texts. The buddha traces his descent from this king.

Thomas: I think this as empty speculation.

The term Aryan used in 'arya atthangika magga' does not refer to the path of Aryan race.

In the Buddha's day, it did very much primarily refer to the Indo-Aryan ethnicity & its culture in India (and in nearby Achaemenid Persia it was used in pretty much the same sense, as an ethnic self-designation of the Persians). By calling it the Aryan eightfold path, the buddha was emphasizing that it was in accord with the high culture and ideals of the Aryan community, and was therefore not vile or blameworthy. As Buddhism in the centuries following the buddha's time became internationalized (spread to Sri Lanka and other countries), the ethnic sense was lost, and it was interpreted as an ethical ideal.

When the commentators, many centuries afterwards, began to write Pali in S. India & Ceylon, far from the ancient seat of the Aryan clans, the racial sense of the word ariya was scarcely, if at all, present to their minds. Dhammapāla especially was probably a non -- Aryan, and certainly lived in a Dravidian environment. The then current similar popular etmologies of ariya and arahant (cp. next article) also assisted the confusion in their minds. They sometimes therefore erroneously identify the two words and explain Aryans as meaning Arahants (DhA i.230; SnA 537; PvA 60). In other ways also they misrepresented the old texts by ignoring the racial force of the word. Thus at J v.48 the text, speaking of a hunter belonging to one of the aboriginal tribes, calls him anariya -- rūpa. The C. explains this as "shameless", but what the text has, is simply that he looked like a non -- Aryan. (cp ʻ frank ʼ in English).

Thomas: It certainly does not mean that the ethnic/racial sense being used for the eightfold path (for the cessation of dukkha).

Also, being a Kshatriya, or accessing to the Brahmanical study, does not mean the 'racial appearance' of the Buddha must be an Aryan.

I see this as empty speculation.

Thomas: No it is not. E.g. those who speak only English do not mean they must be English persons.

the kingdom called Videha (capital city: Mithilaa), whose people were not Aryans.

Said who?[/quote]

Thomas : You may try to do some studies about the kingdom of Videha.
Here two cf: A History of India (1990; by Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund), pp. 50 ff), and 'Appendix 1: Historical and Textual Background of Buddhism' in the book, Annotated Translation of Sutras from the Chinese Samyuktaagama relevant to the Early Buddhism Teachings on Emptiness and the Middle Way (reprinted 2010, by Mun-keat Choong), pp. 80, 82).

srkris wrote:Buddha (DN3: Ambaṭṭha Sutta): "The rāja Okkāka is the ancestor of the sakyas."

Okkāka (Ikṣvāku) was a famous Vedic (pre-buddhist) king mentioned in the Ṛgveda and in many other pre-buddhist texts. The buddha traces his descent from this king.

Thomas: I think this as empty speculation.

I was just quoting from a sutta. If you think the buddha was lying or speculating about his clan's Indo-Aryan origins (as recorded in the sutta), that is your wish.

Thomas: It certainly does not mean that the ethnic/racial sense being used for the eightfold path (for the cessation of dukkha).

The PTS dictionary (as I've quoted above) says it was originally used in an ethnic/racial sense. You say it was not, again maybe you know better.

Thomas: No it is not. E.g. those who speak only English do not mean they must be English persons.

If you think there were non-Indo-Aryan Brahmins and Kshatriyas in the Buddha's time and place, and that the Buddha himself might have been one, well that is certainly a novel idea. But I dont see any evidences in favour of your idea.

Thomas : You may try to do some studies about the kingdom of Videha.
Here two cf: A History of India (1990; by Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund), pp. 50 ff), and 'Appendix 1: Historical and Textual Background of Buddhism' in the book, Annotated Translation of Sutras from the Chinese Samyuktaagama relevant to the Early Buddhism Teachings on Emptiness and the Middle Way (reprinted 2010, by Mun-keat Choong), pp. 80, 82).

srkris wrote:
Okkāka (Ikṣvāku) was a famous Vedic (pre-buddhist) king mentioned in the Ṛgveda and in many other pre-buddhist texts. The buddha traces his descent from this king.

I was just quoting from a sutta. If you think the buddha was lying or speculating about his clan's Indo-Aryan origins (as recorded in the sutta), that is your wish.

Thomas: Which sutta records 'the Buddha traces his descent from this king', who is Indo-Aryan race'?

Thomas: It certainly does not mean that the ethnic/racial sense being used for the eightfold path (for the cessation of dukkha).

The PTS dictionary (as I've quoted above) says it was originally used in an ethnic/racial sense. You say it was not, again maybe you know better.

Thomas: I think your quotations clearly do not support that 'originally' used in ethnic/racial sense for the eightfold path by the Buddha.

Thomas: No it is not. E.g. those who speak only English do not mean they must be English persons.

If you think there were non-Indo-Aryan Brahmins and Kshatriyas in the Buddha's time and place, and that the Buddha himself might have been one, well that is certainly a novel idea. But I dont see any evidences in favour of your idea.

Thomas: Another e.g.: Brahmins and Kshatriyas in 'Tamil' Hinduism are not Indo-Aryan race.

Thomas : You may try to do some studies about the kingdom of Videha.
Here two cf: A History of India (1990; by Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund), pp. 50 ff), and 'Appendix 1: Historical and Textual Background of Buddhism' in the book, Annotated Translation of Sutras from the Chinese Samyuktaagama relevant to the Early Buddhism Teachings on Emptiness and the Middle Way (reprinted 2010, by Mun-keat Choong), pp. 80, 82).

The Buddha, being from Nepal, was of the Mongoloid race. The Kirats were the ruling people of ancient Nepal:

Kirata Kingdom (Kirat) in Sanskrit literature and Hindu mythology refers to any kingdom of the Kirata people, who were dwellers mostly in the Himalayas (mostly eastern Himalaya). They took part in the Kurukshetra War along with Parvatas (mountaineers) and other Himalayan tribes. They were widespread in the folds and valleys of Himalayas in Nepal and Bhutan, and also migrated to Indian states of Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Darjeeling (West Bengal), Assam and Tripura including west mountain of Pakistan. Kirata dynasty was established by king Yalamber...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirata_Kingdom

Kusala wrote:I did some research on the subject and concluded that the Buddha, without a shadow of a doubt, was an Aryan. The Pali Cannon describes the Buddha as tall, handsome, blue eyed...from Afghanistan to Northern India, you find people that could possibly be the descendants of the ancient Aryans...

Yes, he was an Aryan, as evidenced by language, - and blue eyes in the list give an important hint.
A mongoloid would have spoken Tibeto-Burman language.

Michael Witzel wrote on the origin of Sakyas:

Both the Malla and Vrji apparently immigrated into the east only after the end of the Vedic period, but well before the time of the Buddha (c. 400 B.C.). This must have been one of the last great infiltrations in Vedic times of western peoples into the lower Gangå area. More or less about this time the so-called second urbanization began as well.

Nevertheless, the settlement pattern in the east was not as homogenous as it was in the more western areas where the indigenous population had become Indo-Aryan in language and culture since the Mantra period. Instead, the Kosala-Videha area was one of great mixture of peoples. There were some earlier eastern Indo-Aryan settlers, the local Munda people and some Tibeto-Burmese elements. Then, various types and groups new immigrants entered from the areas further west. These were some brahmanically oriented tribes but also other non-orthoprax Indo-Aryan tribes such as the Malla and Vrji. They immigrated from northwestern India into Bihar which had been already settled by the old, para-Vedic Indo-Aryan tribes such as the Iksvåku, Kosala, Kåśi, and Videha.

Many of these tribes, including the Śakya to whom the Buddha belonged, are called asurya in ŚB. For it is the Sakya and their neighbors, the Malla, Vajji, etc. who are reported in the Påli texts as builders of high grave mounds, such as the one built for the Buddha. According to ŚB 12.8.1.5 the “easterners and others(!)” are reported to have round “demonic” graves, some of which may have been excavated at Lauriya in E. Nepal. These graves are similar to the kurgan type grave mounds of S. Russia and Central Asia. However, the origin of the Śakya is not as clear as that of the Malla and Vrji. They may very well have been (northern) Iranian, and would then constitute an earlier, apparently the first wave of the later Śaka invasions from Central Asia.

Santi253 wrote:The Buddha, being from Nepal, was of the Mongoloid race. The Kirats were the ruling people of ancient Nepal:

Kirata Kingdom (Kirat) in Sanskrit literature and Hindu mythology refers to any kingdom of the Kirata people, who were dwellers mostly in the Himalayas (mostly eastern Himalaya). They took part in the Kurukshetra War along with Parvatas (mountaineers) and other Himalayan tribes. They were widespread in the folds and valleys of Himalayas in Nepal and Bhutan, and also migrated to Indian states of Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Darjeeling (West Bengal), Assam and Tripura including west mountain of Pakistan. Kirata dynasty was established by king Yalamber...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirata_Kingdom

This is what the Buddha would look like if he were alive today:

We can't say with 100% certainty what the Buddha would have looked like, but if we look closely at ancient scriptures, archaeological and genetic evidence we can get a pretty accurate description of the historical Buddha.

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

I understand that the picture itself may not have been made during the Buddha's time, but it does depict what the people of ancient Nepal would have looked like. They would have looked similar to how Tibetans look today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirati_people

The Kirats were the ruling people of ancient Nepal. Of course, it wouldn't bother me if the Buddha were of a different race entirely, since the Dharma transcends racial distinctions.

jalsrix wrote:Regarding the debate of whether he was Mongoloid or Indo-Iranian,please remember that the Buddhist sutras were written 500 years after his death.
So it's highly possible that the Indian disciples decided to 'Indianised' him even though he's originally wasn't an Indo-Aryan by giving him a Sanskrit name etc.

There are many interesting debate at this link below and you can form your opinions on who is correct or wrong.

I would argue that the Buddhist oral tradition is just as reliable, if not more reliable than written traditions...

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

Some Brahmins held the Buddha in high regard...the Brahmin, Cankti, for instance...

"...When this was said, the brahmin Cankī told those brahmins: “Now, sirs, hear from me why it is proper for me to go to see Master Gotama, and why it is not proper for Master Gotama to come to see me. Sirs, the recluse Gotama is well born on both sides, of pure maternal and paternal descent seven generations back, unassailable and impeccable in respect of birth. Since this is so, sirs, it is not proper for Master Gotama to come to see me; rather, it is proper for me to go to see Master Gotama.

Sirs, the recluse Gotama went forth abandoning much gold and bullion stored away in vaults and depositories. Sirs, the recluse Gotama went forth from the home life into homelessness while still young, a black-haired young man endowed with the blessing of youth, in the prime of life.

Sirs, the recluse Gotama shaved off his hair and beard, put on the yellow robe, and went forth from the home life into homelessness though his mother and father wished otherwise and wept with tearful faces. Sirs, the recluse Gotama is handsome, comely, and graceful, possessing supreme beauty of complexion, [167] with sublime beauty and sublime presence, remarkable to behold.

Sirs, the recluse Gotama is virtuous, with noble virtue, with wholesome virtue, possessing wholesome virtue. Sirs, the recluse Gotama is a good speaker with a good delivery; he speaks words that are courteous, distinct, flawless, and communicate the meaning. Sirs, the recluse Gotama is a teacher of the teachers of many. Sirs, the recluse Gotama is free from sensual lust and without personal vanity. Sirs, the recluse Gotama holds the doctrine of the moral efficacy of action, the doctrine of the moral efficacy of deeds; he does not seek any harm for the line of brahmins. Sirs, the recluse Gotama went forth from an aristocratic family, from one of the original noble families..."

Yes, this is very high regard, including the Buddha's appearance!But it does not imply the Buddha looks like an Aryan person: '... a black-haired ...'
[/b]
Regards,

Thomas

I don't think hair color is a determining factor. The "Blonde, Blue Eyed" Nazi Ideal probably isn't what the historical Aryans looked like. We have to look at other clues. The Buddha was tall, blue eyed...these attributes are very good clues...

"...the first farmers from the Near East arrived in Europe; they carried both genes for light skin. As they interbred with the indigenous hunter-gatherers, one of their light-skin genes swept through Europe...The Yamnaya have the greatest genetic potential for being tall of any of the populations, which is consistent with measurements of their ancient skeletons..."

Thousands of horsemen may have swept into Bronze Age Europe, transforming the local populationhttp://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/ ... population
"Europeans are the descendants of at least three major migrations of prehistoric people. First, a group of hunter-gatherers arrived in Europe about 37,000 years ago. Then, farmers began migrating from Anatolia (a region including present-day Turkey) into Europe 9000 years ago, but they initially didn’t intermingle much with the local hunter-gatherers because they brought their own families with them. Finally, 5000 to 4800 years ago, nomadic herders known as the Yamnaya swept into Europe..."

"Moorjani's past research revealed that all people in India trace their heritage to two genetic groups: An ancestral North Indian group originally from the Near East and the Caucasus region, and another South Indian group that was more closely related to people on the Andaman Islands."

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

Diego Hemken wrote:A samana is someone who lives in poverty. They do not wear cosmetics, jewelery, or fancy clothing. They do not bathe a lot. They wear just about the most basic clothing possible, a robe, often made of discarded rags and whatnot. They do not even sit on high chairs. Their food an shelter is by default meager. They do not enjoy entertainment, women, slaves, food at the wrong time, etc. They do not raise a family.

I think for all of these reasons it is easy to see why a Brahman, unaware of the attainments and nobility of the Buddha, would call a samana an outcaste. Being a samana is basically being a bum. A bum who is dedicated to sila and jhana, but still a bum.

The Brahmans were aware of the nobility of the Buddha. I think it had a lot more to do with fear. The samanas and brahmins were competing with one another, then came along a Kashirtya nobleman turned sadhu/samana to challenge them...

By the way, just look at this sadhu with piercing blue eyes...

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

Brahmins of the Dha­nañjānī clan believed that they were superior to other Brahmins. Bharādvāja, a Brahmin of this group, called his wife vasalī because she followed the Buddha.It is important to note the Brahmin used the word vasalī(m. vasala) for woman of his own clan.(Brahmins are divided into many sub-groups and practice endogamy within their sub-groups.)

It seems the term Vasala 'outcaste' used in Sn 1.7 Vasala-sutta means:

"To the Brahmana the Buddha was an 'outcaste' because, as a Sramana, he accepted food from anyone"
(see Choong Mun-keat, 2009, 'A comparison of the Pali and Chinese versions of the Brahmana Samyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the priestly Brahmanas', Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 19 (3): p. 375, n. 9).